mooseOAK wrote:Carolina is one point out of a playoff spot, why trade a defenceman?

That’s a fair point.

I have to imagine they will need to promise Fox a spot next season and their right side already has two outstanding defenders, one very good defender, and one solid defender. Even TvR would be an upgrade on Zaitsev.

So, maybe they hold off until after the season since that’s when the Fox issue really arrives. But if they want to move on from Faulk, and he’s the one that rumours suggest the Canes are most interested in moving, they would be better to move him now where he has two playoff runs left. Plus, they could use help up front. Why not deal from that surplus to get your forward(s)?

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." - Ronald Coase"[...]all models are wrong, some are useful." - George E. P. Box

Philthy Thrillz wrote:How much cap space will the Leafs have at the tdd, assuming no other deals are made? And how much of the players cap % is left at tdd?

Basically the leafs have x in cap they can add said player with y cap hit.

Technically they have $4.32 million in cap space, with $14 million they can add today and $20 million on trade deadline day. That is without using Horton’s LTIR which would add another $5 million they could spend.

Unfortunately, i think they are pretty much tapped out if they want to ensure there is no bonus carryover next year.

Thomas Malthus wrote:Yeah, they have Hamilton, Faulk, Pesce, TvR, think Fox is ready. And I can’t imagine that Johnsson is enough to bring back Pesce AND convince the Canes the take Zaitsev. Even though we’re weaker on the left side I’d much rather move Johnsson than Kapanen for D help. I’m not convinced that grabbing a guy like Pesce at the expense of Kapanen or Johnsson + would be better than not losing those guys and grabbing Weegar or Jensen to replace Zaitsev. Maybe even a riskier guy like Honka or Andersson.

I do think that some teams value Zaitsev. Babcock seems to like him and there are plenty of other coaches who love guys like Russell. Having said that, if we need to move Zaitsev and other teams know that, they likely won’t be willing to do us any favours.

Another strategy for dealing with Marceau could be trading him to Arizona or somewhere that needs to hit the floor and having them retain some of his cap hit and trade him back to us. Unless I’m misremembering some bits of the CBA rules.

Arizona cannot retain salary and trade Marleau back to us, but the Leafs can pay his bonus, trade him to a team that buys him out and then retain him at a reduced cap hit.

Thomas Malthus wrote:Yeah, they have Hamilton, Faulk, Pesce, TvR, think Fox is ready. And I can’t imagine that Johnsson is enough to bring back Pesce AND convince the Canes the take Zaitsev. Even though we’re weaker on the left side I’d much rather move Johnsson than Kapanen for D help. I’m not convinced that grabbing a guy like Pesce at the expense of Kapanen or Johnsson + would be better than not losing those guys and grabbing Weegar or Jensen to replace Zaitsev. Maybe even a riskier guy like Honka or Andersson.

I do think that some teams value Zaitsev. Babcock seems to like him and there are plenty of other coaches who love guys like Russell. Having said that, if we need to move Zaitsev and other teams know that, they likely won’t be willing to do us any favours.

Another strategy for dealing with Marceau could be trading him to Arizona or somewhere that needs to hit the floor and having them retain some of his cap hit and trade him back to us. Unless I’m misremembering some bits of the CBA rules.

Arizona cannot retain salary and trade Marleau back to us, but the Leafs can pay his bonus, trade him to a team that buys him out and then retain him at a reduced cap hit.

Thomas Malthus wrote:Yeah, they have Hamilton, Faulk, Pesce, TvR, think Fox is ready. And I can’t imagine that Johnsson is enough to bring back Pesce AND convince the Canes the take Zaitsev. Even though we’re weaker on the left side I’d much rather move Johnsson than Kapanen for D help. I’m not convinced that grabbing a guy like Pesce at the expense of Kapanen or Johnsson + would be better than not losing those guys and grabbing Weegar or Jensen to replace Zaitsev. Maybe even a riskier guy like Honka or Andersson.

I do think that some teams value Zaitsev. Babcock seems to like him and there are plenty of other coaches who love guys like Russell. Having said that, if we need to move Zaitsev and other teams know that, they likely won’t be willing to do us any favours.

Another strategy for dealing with Marceau could be trading him to Arizona or somewhere that needs to hit the floor and having them retain some of his cap hit and trade him back to us. Unless I’m misremembering some bits of the CBA rules.

Arizona cannot retain salary and trade Marleau back to us, but the Leafs can pay his bonus, trade him to a team that buys him out and then retain him at a reduced cap hit.

The buyout period is before his bonus is paid. Can’t do that either.

How did Washington do it with Orpik. I was under the impression that he had a bonus payment as well.

AGENT ZERO wrote:How did Washington do it with Orpik. I was under the impression that he had a bonus payment as well.

Colorado ate the remainder of the deal. I haven't seen anything against retaining salary and flipping the player back to his original club though.

There may not be specific rules, but if these things are predetermined, the league can deny it. Lecavalier to Toronto several years ago was vetoed and that was a compliance buyout.

The difference being the compliance buyout made the cap hit disappear. Leafs trading Marleau with assets to Arizona and then trading him back at half the cap hit doesn't make any cap hit disappear. I have no idea how Bettman and Co would feel about this type of move.

vf wrote:Colorado ate the remainder of the deal. I haven't seen anything against retaining salary and flipping the player back to his original club though.

There may not be specific rules, but if these things are predetermined, the league can deny it. Lecavalier to Toronto several years ago was vetoed and that was a compliance buyout.

The difference being the compliance buyout made the cap hit disappear. Leafs trading Marleau with assets to Arizona and then trading him back at half the cap hit doesn't make any cap hit disappear. I have no idea how Bettman and Co would feel about this type of move.

No, I get it. But I was just pointing out, it wasn’t against the rules, but the NHL stepped in to say no. And I think they’d do the same here.

Dellow has a piece over at the Athletic where he takes a look at an area where the Leafs are really bad—defensive zone faceoffs.

We’re horrifically bad after losses and still pretty bad after wins. Actually, we’re really good after wins on the left side but really, really bad after wins on the right side.

He’s mainly just pointing out that this is an issue and doesn’t really offer much in the line of solutions, though he does note that it seems the Leafs are less aggressive than teams that are good in this area like Vegas, Minny, or Nashville. We’ve had some bad luck in this area, according to him, as our sv% and sh% on shifts that start in the defensive zone are low. Talent and tactics are possible explanations but he thinks tactics is more likely.

His main point is that this seems like an obvious place to make some improvements and they won’t require new players.

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." - Ronald Coase"[...]all models are wrong, some are useful." - George E. P. Box

Permitted myself a look at a couple of the Leafs discussion sites. Basically, the team has the 6th best record in the league largely on the strength of 5-on-5 play but Babcock is a terrible stubborn SOB who just won’t change things up when it’s clear his lines aren’t working.

Curry Rage wrote:Permitted myself a look at a couple of the Leafs discussion sites. Basically, the team has the 6th best record in the league largely on the strength of 5-on-5 play but Babcock is a terrible stubborn SOB who just won’t change things up when it’s clear his lines aren’t working.

I mean, those two things aren’t mutually exclusive.

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." - Ronald Coase"[...]all models are wrong, some are useful." - George E. P. Box

No, but a team that scores more 5v5 than just about any team in the league is ticking some of the right boxes. Scoring more than you give up 5v5 is basically what hockey is. Online coaches tend to look at individual production and make the leap that a player producing more would necessarily be better/continue that production higher in the lineup. And/or they look at small samples of particular combos, see results they like and assume that would continue if the combo were together long term and that the net effect on team performance would be better.

I'm still not sure I want anything to do with Luke Glendening, but the more I read about him from Red Wings fans and hear from his coach and teammates the more I wonder if he wouldn't help us considerably. By all accounts he has a relentless motor and consistently takes tough matchups against the oppositions better players. His goalies have also consistently posted higher save percentages when he is on the ice over his career. Maybe if the Red Wings eat 50% it could make sense *shrugs*.

In seriousness though, I agree with TM I don't quite see the logic here. The pics are nudes of herself, and Kapanen isn't married and he was in a relationship with this girl so there's no scandal here really.

Sigh. I can only hope these pairings don't stick, but I don't quite understand the logic of acquiring Muzzin only to still have Hainsey in the top 4. I get where Babs is coming from wanting Rielly to be on the left side, but then why not move up Dermott instead? Now we've got the same issue as before, and the #3 and #4 guys talentwise (Gardiner and Dermott) get fucked in the process too.

This is one of the worries I had when Muzzin was mentioned as a trade candidate for the Leafs. If these are the pairings Babcock is going to run out then all we accomplished by trading a 1st++ is upgrading the third pair. Dubas needs to add a RHD and dump one of Hainsey or Z in the process so that Babcock cannot play them over the upgrade.

I guess we have to hope that Dubas can move Zaitsev and grab Jensen before the deadline.

I'd like to see Muzzin on the right side before defaulting back to Hainsey with Mo. I know he hasn't played the right side much and Babs wanted Muzzin to get used to the systems before messing with him but I'd much rather try that out than return to Hainsey facing tough competition.

In the meanwhile:a) Just because it's this way in practice doesn't mean that it'll be this way come game time. Babs doesn't take a blender to the forwards that much but lately he's been quick to juggle D pairings. b) We'll have to see what the situational usage ends up being. Does Babs put Dermott or Gardiner out beside Mo or Muzzin on offensive zone faceoffs? That could help take some of the edge off. Even though Hainsey and Zaitsev play with Gardiner and Mo, who get a lot of ES icetime, they get much less usage at 5v5. I'm guessing that we'll see Gardiner and Dermott out there with Rielly and Muzzin despite these nominally being the pairings.

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." - Ronald Coase"[...]all models are wrong, some are useful." - George E. P. Box

Whit Dickman wrote:I mean, Rielly-Hainsey / Muzzin-Zaitsev / Gardiner-Dermott is easily the most even spreading of talent. I.e., none of the pairings will be a liability. It means having a weaker top pair, though.

I would prefer that Babcock load up the top 4 and play his weakest defenceman together in sheltered minutes. We already know what Rielly-Hainsey looks like against tough competition in the playoffs, and it's not great.

In seriousness though, I agree with TM I don't quite see the logic here. The pics are nudes of herself, and Kapanen isn't married and he was in a relationship with this girl so there's no scandal here really.

I guess I’m just old. It used to be that any photos of a celeb/player involving tits would’ve been a scandal in and of itself. Remember the fuss over Tlusty sending pics of his dong around?

In seriousness though, I agree with TM I don't quite see the logic here. The pics are nudes of herself, and Kapanen isn't married and he was in a relationship with this girl so there's no scandal here really.

I guess I’m just old. It used to be that any photos of a celeb/player involving tits would’ve been a scandal in and of itself. Remember the fuss over Tlusty sending pics of his dong around?

LOL

Or what about Mike Zigomanis' ass?

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." - Ronald Coase"[...]all models are wrong, some are useful." - George E. P. Box

On the trade front, I'd like to see if we could add a guy like Nic Petan if the Jets don't want him. Could be a good buy low candidate / reclamation project to shore up the left side (or if he can't play wing instead of centre then I thin he might be an improvement on the Goat/Lindholm).

"If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything." - Ronald Coase"[...]all models are wrong, some are useful." - George E. P. Box